Grading the BBWAA

For many years now the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) have gotten away with putting forth historically bad recipients for their respective awards. Since there is apparently no one else to hold them accountable for their actions, I thought I'd go ahead and do it on this blog, which Commissioner Bud Selig reads every day, hence assuring that all incompetence will be extinguished.

Class is now in session.


A.L. Cy Young: Cliff Lee






BBWAA Grade: A







You really couldn't have gone wrong here with Lee or Halladay. Both were very good, but I'd agree with the voters and give Lee the slight edge. The only real gripe I have hear is the fact that K-Rod finished third in the Cy Young voting. You could maybe make a case that he was third best A.L. reliever, although even that would be pretty farfetched. However, I can live with it since Lee and Halladay finished 1-2. Good job here, guys.


NL Cy Young: Tim Lincecum






BBWAA Grade: A










Thankfully, there was no real scare here with Brandon Webb. Lincecum won it easily, and it was much deserved. Kudos to the writers for also recognizing Santana's great season as well. Maybe they're learning? Or getting smarter voters? Who knows.


A.L. Manager of the Year:
Joe Maddon





BBWAA Grade: B







Maddon has gotten FAR too much credit for what he's done in Tampa Bay. Sure, he's done a fine job and it's great that they were able to turn things around this season, but he had much less to do with it than what would be perceived by the media. As Grif has attested to many times (not here, but other places), Maddon made quite a few God-awful decisions throughout the season. The grade would be worse were it not for the implement of the bullpen ace format--although it's unclear whether that's a front office creation or managerial preference. Obviously I can certainly understand the reasoning for voting for Maddon, it just seems evident after looking deeper into it that Gardenhire would've been the better choice. Still not the worst decision, though.


NL Manager of the Year:
Lou Piniella




BBWAA Grade: A





No argument here. Great manager. Great choice.


AL Rookie of the Year:
Evan Longoria





BBWAA Grade: A








Mike Aviles probably should've finished higher, but they got the most important one right so I'll let it pass. This was a pretty easy one, though.


NL Rookie of the Year:
Geovany Soto





BBWAA Grade: C-








Don't be fooled here. Geovany Soto was the right choice. I'm penalizing the voters for something much worse. Edinson Volquez finished fourth in the Rookie of the Year voting DESPITE NOT EVEN BEING A ROOKIE! That's right, somehow a player who is not even eligible to win the award snuck on to the ballot. Not only that, HE GARNERED THREE SECOND PLACE VOTES! So, while I've overlooked the entirety of the ballot with other awards, I simply can't ignore such sheer stupidity. Seriously, how were these ballots even allowed to be counted? How hard is it to look up the eligibility of a player before you vote? I just looked it up on B-R in about 9 seconds. So the answer is: not very hard. These three writers--whoever they are--should be removed lest we see Derek Jeter finish third in the Cy Young voting in 2009. I applaud you guys for at least getting the winner right, but this is just... there are no words.


Overall BBWAA Grade So Far: C+


I know, the math doesn't quite add up. I ended up docking some serious points for Edinson Volquez receiving three goddamn votes (not to mention Kosuke Fukudome???). But hey, I'm surprised I was able to stay objective for as long as I did. Chances are the BBWAA will tragically fuck up one of the MVP awards, anyways, thus justifying my exaggerated disdain.

Delgado for MVP!

Soto for MVP?

I have always loved Peter Gammons. I never thought I would ever be able to bring myself to say something negative about him. Even as I write this I feel like I'm breaking some kind of Baseball rule. But after giving it a lot of thought, I came to the conclusion that this is inexcusable, no matter how much I may like the guy.

Rookie Soto a viable MVP candidate

That's the title. I know what you're thinking. It's a typo. He meant to say that Soto is a viable Rookie of the Year candidate. Sure, it seems painstakingly obvious that Soto would be a viable ROY candidate, but at least it's true.

Much to my chagrin, however, it is not a typo.

The thought came out of nowhere. "You should," a Cubs player said, "be talking up Geovany Soto as the MVP. Think about it."

No. Don't do it, Pete. Please. I'm begging you.

A rookie catcher as MVP? "Take his position, take what our pitchers have done, take his production," the player continued. "Who in the National League is more valuable?"

Albert Pujols, Lance Berkman, Hanley Ramirez, Matt Holliday, Jose Reyes, Chipper Jones, Chase Utley, David Wright...

Don't listen to him! It's a trap! Who the hell is this "player" you're talking to anyway? Is it Lee? I bet it's Lee. He's probably pissed off he didn't win the MVP in '05 and now he's out to to fuck up the whole voting process. Fuck you Lee for putting this idea in Peter's head.

The first point is that on the Ides of August there is no clear choice for MVP. Albert Pujols (.342 BA, 24 HR, 75 RBIs, 28 intentional walks, 1.053 OPS) and Ryan Ludwick (.304, 30, 90) have carried the Cardinals to contention in a year when no St. Louis lead has been safe. Lance Berkman is hitting .333 with 25 homers and a 1.042 OPS, but the Astros' dash is for .500. The two leading home run hitters, Ryan Howard and Adam Dunn, are hitting in the .230s.

It comforts me a little bit when someone like Gammons--who's been around the game for 263 years-- has the open-mindedness to cite statistics such as OPS. It's no VORP or EQA, but it's something that still tends to take a back seat to stats like Batting Average and RBI by almost every ESPN "analyst."
It puzzles me, though, that Gammons chooses to post Pujols' OPS but neglects to do so with guys like Ludwick and Dunn. If he did, then you would see that Ludwick trails Pujols by 76 points and Dunn, despite having the .230 average, has an .896 OPS.
Although, I do think that Gammons is right in one regard. As of now, I don't believe that there is any real clear choice for MVP. I think at this point it's pretty much between Pujols and Berkman, with Hanley Ramirez slowly sneaking into contention.

Chase Utley is certainly in the race, with 30 homers and 80 RBIs. So is Ryan Braun, with similar numbers. One magic September might push David Wright past everyone.

Ryan Braun??? The guy with an OBP exactly at league average? That Ryan Braun?! I really wish someone that I blatantly disliked wrote this article.

So when one looks at Soto and sees that his 18 homers, 69 RBIs and .870 OPS are second among catchers to Atlanta's underappreciated Brian McCann (21 HR, 69 RBIs, .933 OPS), then appreciate what he has done as a rookie handling the Chicago pitchers. In total, the suggestion that he be considered for MVP is at least thought-provoking.

So... there's a player at Soto's same position (catcher) who is producing considerably better than him. Also, I can appreciate what Soto has been able to accomplish, I just don't think it should make him a viable MVP candidate. And I also think the fact that he's a rookie should have absolutely nothing to do with it at all.

The larger issue is catching itself. And how remarkable it is that Soto, who signed as a third baseman, converted into an All-Star rookie catcher and became the frontispiece of what right now is the best team in baseball.

Russell Martin was also signed as a third baseman and converted into a catcher. It's cool, but it's not like it's unheard of. And it certainly should have no bearing on the MVP.

If Geovany Soto doesn't wear down in September and ends up with close to 30 homers and 90-something RBIs and "Go, Cubs, Go" is ringing down Waveland Avenue, perhaps he'll end up in what appears to be a muddled MVP race. Odds are that he won't end up in the MVP finals, but in mid-August it is an intriguing thought, especially when the thought itself comes from one of his pitchers.

Perhaps he will end up in the MVP race. Crazier things have happened. Jimmy Rollins won the MVP last year despite not even being the best player at his position, or his team. Andre Dawson won the MVP during a year in which he got on base like 16 times all season (maybe it was 17, I don't remember). Somehow Juan Gonzalez won twice! So yeah, it's plausible that the voters could give Soto some kind of ridiculous chance to win the MVP. Is he in any way, shape, or form deserving of that consideration? No. Not by a long shot.

This marks the first and last time I will ever post anything negative about Peter Gammons. I already feel like less of a person for doing so.

Why Players Shouldn't be Trusted Reason No. 1

This is a player's poll from the August 4 issue of Sports Illustrated:

Which rookie has impressed you the most?
Based on a survey of 449 MLB players

Geovany Soto, Cubs C......21%
Evan Longoria, Rays 3B......16%
Edinson Volquez, Reds P......16%
Jacoby Ellsbury, Red Sox OF......12%
Jay Bruce, Reds OF......10%

Now, there are a few problems with this. Beyond just the idea of putting Jay Bruce and Jacoby Ellsbury (respective VORPs of 5.2 and 5.0) ahead of Mike Aviles (25.1), Jair Jurrjens (33.4), Jorge Campillo (33.2) or any other of the FIFTY SEVEN rookies with higher VORPs than them (14 position players),* there's a more glaring issue.

See, Edinson Volquez had 80 career innings pitched at the Major League level before this year. A player loses his rookie eligibility at 50.

What does this mean? It means that the players polled by Sports Illustrated determined that Edinson Volquez -- who is not a rookie -- is the second best rookie in all of baseball.

Athletes are awesome because they play sports very, very well. They understand a lot of what they need to do to do their job well, and they're athletically gifted. Too often, though, we decide this means they're a good choice to analyze the sport for us, and clearly this is a great example that they are not necessarily suited to do that. An athlete isn't necessarily paying enough attention to the sport nor do they necessarily have the understanding to analyze it on a major level.


*Yes, I'm aware I just totally ignored defense. Work with me here.